Buring gas has extra costs such as pollution and the costs the country has to incur protecting its oil interests. When you ignore those external costs, it's small wonder gas price in the US is cheap. Low gas prices have undoubtedly contributed to choice of cars American consumers bought in the past years.

Other countries have much higher taxes on gasoline mostly in an attempt to correct such price extortion due to the fact the free market cannot by itsself price in such external costs.

So in this case if Obama et al step in and do something, I don't think it's bad thing. Markets fail sometimes, and the government can do something to alleviate market failure. Believing that the free market is omnipotent is naive.

It seems Obama's government will take action, the free market mechanism's failed.

I wouldn't say that Keez. You can put a hold on the order for 300 million hair shirts for a little while yet.

Half the bigass gashogs on the road here come from Germany and Japan. I was cruising by the auto dealer strip here this afternoon and the salesmen at the local Ford dealership were looking sort of glum but the line of gargantuan pickups and SUVs languishing on the lot at the Toyota dealership next door was pretty near as large as the one
at Ford. There are also a lot of Honda Ridgelines, Toyota Sequoias Nissan Armadas and Honda Pilots that nobody's buying. Good riddance to the entire breed.

Muscle cars are a niche market that'll always be around. Ditto sports cars. They're not transportation, they're for fun. The people who buy them don't care about the cost of fuel any more than your average Porsche pilot does.

Larger cars (Chevy Impala and Malibu, Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Ford Taurus) are something of a necessity here because as you know long distances separate everything and public transport is vestigial. Comfort and endurance is needed. Likewise, at least here on the prairie a lot of people buy trucks because they need them on the farm. They're very useful if you have a need for the platform. I've got a small pickup and nearly bought an '85 Chevrolet 3/4 ton a couple weeks ago because they're so damn useful.

We've already got hybrids from the General, Toyota, Honda, and Ford but the word on the Accord hybrids tested by our police department was that the elevated price didn't make the kind of economic sense that buying Ford Tauruses for the detectives did. So there's a real cost/benefit analysis issue there, particularly if the objective is not to make a green fashion statement but to put a set of wheels under your ass. I do not think the Smart Car will be anything but a novelty, and the price spread between diesel fuel and pump gas is such that it wipes out any economic advantage that can be gained.

The next big revolution in that line will be plug-in hybrids that can go 50 miles without the gas engine ever firing up, and that's what the Volt is going to do.

In general though, I do agree that the wakeup gong has sounded loud and clear. Our next auto purchase will likely be rather small and efficient, either a Honda Fit or a Chevrolet HHR if I can convince the Dragon Lady to support the home team.

Actually, the tough exhaust emission control laws may result in not that many diesel-powered automobiles in the USA, due to the very high cost of cleaning up diesel exhaust emissions. Europe is starting to find out much to their horror that diesel particulates can be a serious health hazard and causes serious pollution problems in the Alpine valleys of Switzerland.

The next trend in environmentally friendly cars will be plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV's), which may start entering the market on a large scale by 2010. PHEV's allow for all-electric operation of the vehicle at ranges up to 80 km (50 miles), which means using essentially no motor fuel for the vast majority of commuters out there.

Yeah, Elite, along with a zillion other businesses. Maybe even the business you might aspire to work for when you grow up and attempt to enter a productive job market yourself.

So many here on these threads seemingly can't recognise there is such a thing as unintended consequences. Just blind, or totally sucked in by the reliable 'reporting' from the media, or faith in the opinions chanted by our great political 'leadership'? Geeze...jack

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 4):The next trend in environmentally friendly cars will be plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV's), which may start entering the market on a large scale by 2010. PHEV's allow for all-electric operation of the vehicle at ranges up to 80 km (50 miles), which means using essentially no motor fuel for the vast majority of commuters out there.

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 4):Actually, the tough exhaust emission control laws may result in not that many diesel-powered automobiles in the USA, due to the very high cost of cleaning up diesel exhaust emissions. Europe is starting to find out much to their horror that diesel particulates can be a serious health hazard and causes serious pollution problems in the Alpine valleys of Switzerland.

I heard a normally reliable car guy mention recently that California would be moving its regulations again and the diesels everybody thinks they will be getting soon won't be legal here again in a couple of years. I have searched Cal EPA and can't find anything about it. It would make sense though that CARB would move the goalposts just when they get something viable.

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 4):The next trend in environmentally friendly cars will be plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV's), which may start entering the market on a large scale by 2010. PHEV's allow for all-electric operation of the vehicle at ranges up to 80 km (50 miles), which means using essentially no motor fuel for the vast majority of commuters out there.

The thermodynamic efficiency of a large power plant is superior to the best internal combustion engines. Modern turbines are much better at converting combustion into mechanical work than piston engines. That means you get more power from the same unit of fuel. Even after transmission losses to get the power to individual vehicles, you still have a net gain in efficiency when you charge a PHEV from the grid. It's also easier to implement new efficiencies at a centralized generation facility than across a whole fleet of cars.

Toyota and Honda have demonstrated life-cycle environmental consciousness in manufacturing batteries and recycling them at end-of-life. And grid power pollutes less for a given quantity of energy. It's win, win.

It has done no such thing. When fuel prices increased, American drivers began buying more fuel efficient vehicles. That is the free market working! And now that fuel prices are going back down, Americans are buying the cars they actually want to drive now that they can afford them again. Who are you to say what type of vehicle someone else should drive?

The fact that oil bubble hit the Big 3 automakers so hard was due to a cascade of failures that began when Congress couldn't implement sensible energy or financial policies. Energy should be cheap and plentiful. The only failure here is one of political leadership.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 9):The thermodynamic efficiency of a large power plant is superior to the best internal combustion engines. Modern turbines are much better at converting combustion into mechanical work than piston engines. That means you get more power from the same unit of fuel. Even after transmission losses to get the power to individual vehicles, you still have a net gain in efficiency when you charge a PHEV from the grid. It's also easier to implement new efficiencies at a centralized generation facility than across a whole fleet of cars.

Not really. The most modern power plants work with approximately 50% thermal efficiency. But how many of them are there? Most of today's powerplants work with roughly 35% efficiency. Add the 7.2 % average transmission losses. The charger, battery and electric drive isn't 100% efficient either. Don't forget that there are utilities that are powered from the engine and somehow are considered granted (included into the car's low thermal efficiency). These would suck on your battery too. Not everyone has California's happy weather, here you need to heat your car for six months a year. At last but definitely not at least, there is not enough power generated in North America to cover the increased demand.

Plug-in hybrids (and purely electric cars too) would make sense if new, large nuclear powerplants were built in the near future. Charging the batteries in times of low demand would help to solve the problems with power output regulation.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 10):
Not really. The most modern power plants work with approximately 50% thermal efficiency. But how many of them are there? Most of today's powerplants work with roughly 35% efficiency. Add the 7.2 % average transmission losses. The charger, battery and electric drive isn't 100% efficient either.

You haven't mentioned the efficiency of the IC engine. The average internal combustion engine is about 20% in ideal conditions, and we know that driving conditions usually aren't ideal.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 10):At last but definitely not at least, there is not enough power generated in North America to cover the increased demand.

This is a non-issue. The adoption of PHEVs will be gradual because they will be introduced in just a handful of models that will be built in low quantities. No one is suggesting that all vehicles will become PHEV in one model year. The U.S. is constantly adding generation capacity and will continue to do so in the future. That growth will simply occur faster as demand increases, unless of course we decide to tax and regulate a major source of energy into bankruptcy.

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 2):Larger cars (Chevy Impala and Malibu, Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Ford Taurus) are something of a necessity here because as you know long distances separate everything and public transport is vestigial.

You are absolutely right that comfort is needed on long distances, Dougloid. But the engine choices offered to the US consumers are ridiculous. I don't see why anyone in the states would need more than 90 hp in above mentioned cars.
The funny thing is that all these cars do have small engine options, just not in America because no one cares (or cared) about efficiency before.

Even in a 90 hp car you can easily exceed 110mph which is way higher than any speed limit in the US

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 9):The thermodynamic efficiency of a large power plant is superior to the best internal combustion engines. Modern turbines are much better at converting combustion into mechanical work than piston engines. That means you get more power from the same unit of fuel. Even after transmission losses to get the power to individual vehicles, you still have a net gain in efficiency when you charge a PHEV from the grid. It's also easier to implement new efficiencies at a centralized generation facility than across a whole fleet of cars.

Don't forget too that a significant part of that power comes from renewable and nonpolluting sources like wind, solar, hydro, geothermal and arguably nuclear. Centralizing the source of pollutants, running the source at best efficiency and applying advanced exhaust gas scrubbing technology makes for a cleaner environment and a lower CO2 load in the atmosphere. In addition the fuel's mostly domestically produced.

Quoting Flexo (Reply 12):You are absolutely right that comfort is needed on long distances, Dougloid. But the engine choices offered to the US consumers are ridiculous. I don't see why anyone in the states would need more than 90 hp in above mentioned cars.
The funny thing is that all these cars do have small engine options, just not in America because no one cares (or cared) about efficiency before.

Even in a 90 hp car you can easily exceed 110mph which is way higher than any speed limit in the US

I think that's where technology like the Volt is going to come in. The engine that will be doing the generating is rather small and all the punch will come from the batteries.

Flexo...yeah, you might eventually get up to 110mph in a 90hp car (what weight? what aero?), but I personally wouldn't want to have to buy a sun dial to time the acceleration. Remember acceleration is an additional safety factor. Mileage? The Impala that's been mentioned rates 32mpg w/standard 3.5 V6. Hell, I'd be more comfortable in that than a 31mpg Camry. And get better mileage, too.

Quoting Cptkrell (Reply 14):Flexo...yeah, you might eventually get up to 110mph in a 90hp car (what weight? what aero?), but I personally wouldn't want to have to buy a sun dial to time the acceleration

Did you ever even try it? I used to drive a 90hp Escort here in Germany and 120mph on the Autobahn was no problem at all. Sundial? Not really.
It's of course not high performance but then again, why would you even need a car that goes faster than 90mph?

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 11):You haven't mentioned the efficiency of the IC engine. The average internal combustion engine is about 20% in ideal conditions, and we know that driving conditions usually aren't ideal.

No. That's the efficiency of the whole car. The engine itself is in the thirties, modern direct injected turbo diesels are close to 40%. Of course, the hybrid or purely electric car has an advantage in recuperative electrodynamic braking.

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 13):Don't forget too that a significant part of that power comes from renewable and nonpolluting sources like wind, solar, hydro, geothermal and arguably nuclear.

Again, not really. In 2006 49 % of all electricity generated in the USA came from coal fired power stations. Only 7% was generated by hydro sources. With 2.4% of other renewables, it's whopping 9.4 %. Only 19.4 % of all production was generated in nuclear power stations. I'd call this whatever but clean.

Just use variable cylinder management like Honda and others do. The V6 Accord also has a 3.5L engine, but it runs on the equivalent of 2.3L or even 1.75L of displacement when cruising.

Quoting Flexo (Reply 12):You are absolutely right that comfort is needed on long distances, Dougloid. But the engine choices offered to the US consumers are ridiculous. I don't see why anyone in the states would need more than 90 hp in above mentioned cars.
The funny thing is that all these cars do have small engine options, just not in America because no one cares (or cared) about efficiency before.

Take a look at the cars equivalent in size to the ones Dougloid mentioned (Impala, Malibu, Accord, Camry, Taurus) that are sold in Europe. They all have more than 90 HP in their base engine. The base European Accord produces 154 HP. So do you want Americans to settle for less than our European counterparts?

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 16):No. That's the efficiency of the whole car. The engine itself is in the thirties, modern direct injected turbo diesels are close to 40%.

35-40% would be about right for the theoretical thermodynamic cycle (Otto, Diesel, perhaps Atkins for hybrids) but does not account for realistic design considerations. When you account for the internal frictions and the need to run engine accessories like fans, fuel pumps, etc (not talking about cabin accessories like HVAC), you start going down. Account for driving conditions and frequent throttling and you lose more efficiency. Realistically, that puts you back to about 20% engine efficiency. The fuel-to-wheel efficiency lower still, but those factors (like transmission, rolling resistance, and drag) would effect PHEVs too.

Electrical motors do not suffer nearly as many losses when converting the stored electricity into mechanical work.

Quoting Flexo (Reply 15):Imagine the mileage if it was a 1.8...
A 3.5 V6 is way too powerful an engine for that car (In a speed restricted country that is).

If the rest of the car would be the same, the fuel economy would be in the ballpark too. I love to compare different rental vehicles on "my test track". I drive from YXC to Creston, drive daily to work in Creston, do my test ride to the Kootenay lake ferry on HWY 3b, then back to YXC. I strive to be consistent while driving. The results are sometimes surprising - the 3.9 litre Buick Allure (Lacrosse for our friends down south) was slightly better on fuel than a 2.5 L Camry (both '06 and '07 models. The 0'7 even had an 5AT. Didn't help) . Cars comparable in size (Camry, G6, Impala, Allure) had very similar fuel efficiency regardless of the engine displacement - they all took roughly 9L/100 km (26 mpg). Surprisingly, the 2.0 litre Ford Focus Wagon was slightly worse (just under 10L/100 km).
Two vehicles were significantly worse - Ford Escape (SUV, go figure) and Pontiac Grand Prix (I really enjoyed the car, so I drove waaaay too fast). Both clocked in roughly at 11.5L/'100 km (20.5 mpg). The only car that was better was the Nissan Versa - 8L/100 km (29.4 mpg). However, it was small, underpowered - overall very bad ride.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 9):
The fact that oil bubble hit the Big 3 automakers so hard was due to a cascade of failures that began when Congress couldn't implement sensible energy or financial policies. Energy should be cheap and plentiful. The only failure here is one of political leadership.

Let's not forget that, if the Big 3 are failing because they failed to build economical vehicles, that is the free market at work again!

Flexo...geeze...yeah I tried it (driving in Germany - almost two years worth in an Opel that would be hard pressed to even merge with traffic) and I didn't like it. I'll vote for my choice of having a vote for my choice. Regards...jack

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 18):35-40% would be about right for the theoretical thermodynamic cycle (Otto, Diesel, perhaps Atkins for hybrids) but does not account for realistic design considerations.

The theoretical efficiency of the diesel cycle is much higher than that - it's aroud 75%. The real life is obviously different.

Look, I know very well that the electic engine is the ideal machine to drive a vehicle. That's just a fact. However, I'm not convinced that these plug - in hybrids (and purely battery powered vehicles too) are the way to go. The road between the primary fuel and the wheel is just too long, therefore I don't consider the efficiency gain compared to and IC engine (especially compared to a modern diesel) worth the hassle. And with 70% of electric energy in the US coming from coal, oil and natural gas fired power stations (many of these are old, therefore less efficient) no one can seriously call this kind of drive clean.

PPVRA; the market mix of economical vehicles via USA manufacturers is not currently what it should be, I'll admit, but your statement that bad fuel mileage is THE reason for our domestic auto mfgr crisis is simply naive on your part. There are plenty of USA good mileage cars.

Autos worldwide are in dire straits, even for those mfgrs with better econ. And as I said, there are multiples of vehicles from the various (USA) mfgrs that offer decent, even competitive fuel mileage.

"We" aren't in a different boat...ALL the car guys are screwed not only here but internationally. (NOV) BMW down 25%, Mercedes in W. Europe -25.2%, Mercedes in Germany -22.9%, in the US -29.5%, in Japan -46%, Toyota shutting mfgr asm for DEC + JAN in Kentucky, Alabama and California. The list goes on past GM, FoMoCo and Chrysler.

I have several different vehicles that probably wouldn't meet any of the hysterical hugger standards here on the forum, but they all serve my purposes for my wants and needs. My free market choice, and when my wants and needs run out or change, I'll look for a different supply of what I need then. Nobody has EVER forced me into any vehicle purchasing decision and I am 65+ years old. The USA cars offer some good mileage vehicles...I chose to buy my wife a 300C Hemi. Free market choice. Chrysler has some good mileage vehicles. It's not their fault I didn't buy one...it was MY/OUR choice. It was also my choice not to try to get her into some 40mpg shitbox.

If I lived in, say, Lady Lake, FL, or some other menopause manner retirement village, or if I was a barber or butcher (no offense intended) on some little 15-foot wide street in some little European community (like I used to), the thread-starter cute toy would be right cool. I might even buy one over perhaps a golf cart... But it wouldn't haul me a rick of firewood, tow my trailer w/ tractor, transport a bush hog, get the old lady to the bank before closing time and stop by the local steakhouse on the way back from our closest redneck town. My Silverado did. regards...jack

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 13):I think that's where technology like the Volt is going to come in. The engine that will be doing the generating is rather small and all the punch will come from the batteries.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 17):Again, not really. In 2006 49 % of all electricity generated in the USA came from coal fired power stations. Only 7% was generated by hydro sources. With 2.4% of other renewables, it's whopping 9.4 %. Only 19.4 % of all production was generated in nuclear power stations. I'd call this whatever but clean.

10 per cent is significant and if you add the 20 per cent from nuclear it's 30 per cent nonpolluting. We're planting a lot of wind farms in this part of the country. I'm not a fan of nuclear myself but it is a clean source of energy so far, and the track record's good here safety wise. It also looks from your chart that there's a certain amount of capacity that's idled here in the states. Small scale hydro was pretty big in this part of the world seventy years ago and it's making a comeback in some places.

The key point is that automobiles are diffuse sources of pollution, and it's a lot more efficiently managed when the generation plant can run at peak efficiency, batteries can be recharged at off hours, and better pollution controls are installed at the generation plant.

You folks do have a lot of hydro, but I do believe if memory serves me right that development of it has not been without controversy.

25 Flighty
: Fuel taxes on gasoline and diesel (and Jet-A) would be a more much cheaper, and more effective option. Just handing out money for research is not the

26 Geekydude
: If only people (including the politicians) could be more like adults, and face the program head on. Slapping on a 2-dollar-per-gallon tax, or even an

27 Flexo
: I feel kind of funny even making this argument because I'm driving a V6 myself. I just think it's silly that many manufacturers don't offer their sma

28 KC135TopBoom
: Then what? Hold on there, Cowboy. All you do with a PHEV is transfer the enegry required from gasoline to the electric grid, which in the US normally

29 Elite
: No, I do realize that there are a lot of unintended consequences, as each of the big 3 employ hundreds of thousands of workers, and those workers sup

30 Alessandro
: The smart has it´s limitations, the advantage is that you can park two in the same parking space as an ordinary car. Fueleconomy is good, downside is

31 Dougloid
: could be, Here's an article. It seems they bought 8 Accord hybrids. I have not yet found an article but the city unloaded them after a year because t

32 Keesje
: Just for all coments / insights. I just bought a roomy comfortable fast if needed (116 mph) car that does 5.4 l / 100 km average (don't know US equiva

33 Flighty
: That car looks beautiful. Today's Peugeots are amazing cars. They WOULD sell here in the USA. We got a bad taste for Peugeot 20 years ago because fra

34 WunalaYann
: These are very true words, although unfortunately not spoken enough. Not all is rosy among French cars but I believe that the new Clio, C5, C4, 308 a

35 Superfly
: blah, blah, blah, I am hanging on to my Lincoln Town Car regardless of what the trendy is today. There is no way I am going to buy one of these silly

36 Mham001
: Excellent point and points out that somebody truly interested in being "green" would simply keep driving the car they have until there is a monumenta

37 Falcon84
: Just catering to what the market was. The U.S. does love it's big gas-guzzlers. Always has. By 2020? Hell, they should be able to get that in any car

38 MAH4546
: And it will probably continue to do so, especially as gas keeps getting cheaper. A look at recent sales data shows that demand for gas-guzzlers has s

39 Falcon84
: It's getting cheaper for now. It's going to go back up, of that I have no doubt. If some people want to have their gas-guzzlers, they can have 'em. a

40 MAH4546
: It took 22 years for gas to shoot back up the last time it sky-rocketed in the 1980s. They haven't stopped, nor will they stop. The "gas guzzlers" st

41 Falcon84
: Their business has hit a wall called reality. They have to reinvent themselves, and in that reinvention, gas-guzzlers shouldn't even be a part of the

42 MAH4546
: You ignored what I said. The problem was that American car companies had no balance. They focused entirely on the gas guzzlers, and ignored cars. Toy